raid
Dad Photographer
Not really; the lens should be both. The performance is necessary but it is not sufficient. Another example is the Heliar 50/3.5 rigid. It is as sharp as the collapsible, but nobody want the ugly duckling.
Who says the I-50 is ugly?
- Thread starter pesphoto
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 33
- Views 3K
Not really; the lens should be both. The performance is necessary but it is not sufficient. Another example is the Heliar 50/3.5 rigid. It is as sharp as the collapsible, but nobody want the ugly duckling.
John Robertson
Well-known
Sorry Raid, the relevance of a lens's "beauty" still escapes me, as long as it is optically and mechanically sound, unless of course it is male jewelery😱
I worked in a friends camera shop at weekends for many years, and there was undoubtedly an element of this. We used to have quite a laugh about it, and take bets on the results behind the scenes.🙄
I worked in a friends camera shop at weekends for many years, and there was undoubtedly an element of this. We used to have quite a laugh about it, and take bets on the results behind the scenes.🙄
bcostin
Well-known
Indeed. I stumbled on that same combination, and I agree, they go well together:
But I have to admit that I kind of like the rigid I-50. It's how something named "Industar" ought to look, somehow.
But I have to admit that I kind of like the rigid I-50. It's how something named "Industar" ought to look, somehow.
rbiemer
Unabashed Amateur
I got lucky and got what I think is an original hood with my rigid I-50. Doesn't help a lot. But I mostly see just a bit of the hood in the VF so it doesn't bother me.😀
Rob
Rob
mh2000
Well-known
Oh come on! (And besides the I-50 is only ok in performance... certainly nothing to get overly excited about)... they do look a little better in SLR mount.
mh2000
Well-known
anyone mount a I-50 on their camera over a pretty white Jupiter-8 when you have both sitting on your shelf?
pesphoto
Veteran
haha, I stumbled upon this photo in yoru Flickr while googling around and it is why I bought my own series V hood, so thanks! YOu should see this lens and hood combo on my Zorki 2c, a think of beauty!
Indeed. I stumbled on that same combination, and I agree, they go well together:
But I have to admit that I kind of like the rigid I-50. It's how something named "Industar" ought to look, somehow.
Last edited:
newspaperguy
Well-known
Beauty treatment for the I-50
Cut a +/- 1/2" wide strip of thin leather and glue it around that bare aluminum base and you've transformed the beast. Even a strip of black masking tape helps to improve the appearance.
Cut a +/- 1/2" wide strip of thin leather and glue it around that bare aluminum base and you've transformed the beast. Even a strip of black masking tape helps to improve the appearance.
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
Here...Here! - common sense, at last!......everyone says this one's ugly too, - but do I care!....it gives f*#&ing good results!!🙄
Attachments
ZorkiKat
ЗоркийК&
- Local time
- 3:41 PM
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2006
- Messages
- 2,070
Something like this, Rick? 🙂
http://jay.fedka.com/index_files/Page521.htm
A little beautification project I did on the I-50 years back....first mentioned this at the Russian camera forum. Got the idea from looking at the base of the Elmar 9cm lens. This lens has got a similar trim.
The leatherette cover not only has cosmetic value; it also gives the lens barrel a better grip when mounting or removing the lens from the camera.
The black version known as the I-50-2 does look better. But I must agree, the I-50 is and excellent lens, just like any good Tessar.
Last edited:
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
Very nice!.....I wish I had the time, - and indeed the inclination to pratt about like this, - with a £6 lens of indifferent quallity! 🙄Something like this, Rick? 🙂
http://jay.fedka.com/index_files/Page521.htm
A little beautification project I did on the I-50 years back....first mentioned this at the Russian camera forum. Got the idea from looking at the base of the Elmar 9cm lens. This lens has got a similar trim.
The leatherette cover not only has cosmetic value; it also gives the lens barrel a better grip when mounting or removing the lens from the camera.
The black version known as the I-50-2 does look better. But I must agree, the I-50 is and excellent lens, just like any good Tessar.
pesphoto
Veteran
I like that ZorkiKat, might give it a go myself
-doomed-
film is exciting
I like this lense and while it is ugly, it nets decent results and can be had cheap. I have it in black , which is slightly less hideous.
I have a few shots in the member galleries that I got from it, but as the OP shows a hood makes it a bit less ugly.
I have a few shots in the member galleries that I got from it, but as the OP shows a hood makes it a bit less ugly.
rbiemer
Unabashed Amateur
That should read, "Doesn't help the ugly a lot". The hood does make a difference with flare.
I thought I'd posted a photo of the R2a and I-50 before but I apparently didn't. So:
And the view of the lens I see is something like this:
I don't really have much to share that I've taken with this lens yet; it functions fine, I'm just not happy with my work with it. Hope fully I'll get something good to put into the one camera one lens gallery.
Rob